"Tomorrow"

Four years ago I did a pretty decent job of predicting Election Night. This time around, my guess is pretty much a reflection of Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight website. I don't think Obama/ Biden will pull out Florida or North Carolina, but they'll get every other swing state and win with 303 electoral votes.

How I see it

Here's how you know President Obama is headed to victory:

• Desperate Attacks in Ohio: The Romney campaign has steadfastly maintained it would "not be dictated by fact-checkers." Never was this more apparent than in its ads that claimed the auto-industry bailout would lead to Chrysler shipping jobs to China. But in a campaign full of half truths and outright lies, that was a bridge too far. Chrysler called them out, and the claims failed to dent Obama's consistent lead. It seems to me this attack was a last-ditch desperate attempt to swing Ohio. If Romney thought he was ahead there, his campaign wouldn't need to resort to such tactics.

• Romney tries to open Pennsylvania: Romney spent parts of the week before the election campaigning in Pennsylvania. The Romney campaign claimed it was expanding the map and laying the groundwork for a landslide. Nonsense. Romney campaigned there for the same reason he ran the Chrysler ads, he knew he wasn't going to win Ohio. McCain did the same thing four years ago, making a late and ultimately unsuccessful play for Pennsylvania. Seeing Romney bound around the Keystone state tells me his advisors can read polls better than many of their supporters, who are hellbent on discrediting Silver's math. But if you can't win Ohio, which normally leans Republican, you ain't winning Pennsylvania, which leans Democrat.

Nate knows. And, really, Mitt does, too.

• Emphasis on tiny states: I actually live in a battleground state media market, New Hampshire. This is just anecdotal evidence, but it seems to me Romney is advertising here far more than Obama. Once again, this tells me that Obama realizes his campaign is 1) ahead NH in polls, and 2) safe electorally without New Hampshire. Romney's appeal for New Hampshire's four electoral votes indicates how desperate he is to patch together 270.

• Threw up in my mouth a little: Last night I watched 60 Minutes which aired a truly disgusting segment on the broken mess that is the U.S. Senate. It was the typical "Both parties are partisan and don't want to get things done!" B.S. that has made shows like 60 Minutes largely irrelevant. The most odious part was watching Tom Coburn, the ultra-conservative senator, say that the Senate is so lacking in leadership that it is better off broken than functioning. Of course no one called him on his crap, but it's a perfect example of why the Right will always triumph in our system: Conrad and his conservative colleagues WANT that disfunction. Steve Kroft, or whichever dinosaur was interviewing Conrad, kept saying that the American people want the parties to come together to solve problems. But he never mentioned that Republicans do not believe the government should solve problems. They do not believe in government. They joined it to destroy it. So when Conrad tells his constituents the Senate is better off not functioning, he wins. That incentive system is what has destroyed the U.S. Congress.

• Gross consequences: This messed up system is what allows Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan (!) to tell people to vote with them because they'll be able to deal with Congress. Think of the cynicism. The Congressional Republicans publicly stated their top goal, with the economy in shambles, was to make Barack Obama a one-term president. They fought him at every step to block his agenda. Now, when Romney says he will be able to get things done the implication is clear: We know that if the president wins the Republicans won't let him do anything, so vote for me and since I'm pushing their agenda and we control the House, and Democrats believe in government action, we'll be able to do something. Either reward our terrible behavior or suffer more of it.

• More awful incentives: A similar incentive system has destroyed U.S. elections. People hate how incessant political campaigning has become and, more than anything, how negative it is. That, too, plays into Republicans' destructive hands. The constant negative campaigning can depress turnout, which helps Republicans. So Republicans go ultra negative, and Democrats (knowing they cannot stay silent) respond with equally negative messages, causing many to tune out and drop out of the process. Again, a win for the conservative movement. Democrats rely on people participating, but Republicans have an incentive to be as negative as possible.

• Excuses excuses: Just like revisionist historians have credited the financial crisis with Obama's big victory in 2008, expect similar Republican handwringing about Hurricane Sandy. But the fact is Romney's momentum stopped before the storm, and the race is now where has always been, save three weeks between the DNC and the first debate: Obama with a small but solid lead.

• A battle for the soul of the Republican party will begin on Wednesday, as establishment Republicans seek to wrest their party back from the Koch brothers/ Tea Party wing of ultra conservatism. The team captains already seem to be staking out their ground, with Governor Chris Christie on one end and Congressman Paul Ryan on the other. Because of the primary system, Ryan's scorched earth orthodoxy will likely win out. That is ultimately bad for Republicans, good for Democrats, and terrible for the country.

On that sunny note, I'll wrap this up. Enjoy the returns. And the weeks of Republicans shouting about how the election was stolen (unless Obama loses, in which case it likely was stolen).

Debate Disaster: Obama's Enthusiasm- Gap and the Return of the Mass. Moderate

Wednesday night's presidential debate was so shockingly one-sided that there are many points that I'd like to make. To the list!

Only Clint Eastwood could have lost this debate

• If President Obama simply fought Mitt Romney to a draw, especially in light Friday's positive jobs report, this race would be over. Obama had opened up a solid lead about a month before the election. He was an average performance away from shoring up victory.

• Obama has never been a world-class debater, but he was so bad in Denver that I have only been able to come up with a couple of explanations, let's take them one by one. To the list within the list!



Obama looking at Bush 41's watch

• Coming off of a very strong convention, Obama had been dominating the campaign for weeks. Romney couldn't get out of his own way. There was his bungled foreign trip, a forgettable convention highlighted by Romney failing to salute the troops and a septuagenarian lecturing an empty chair, the 47% recording, and a host of dismal polls. But the Obama camp should have recognized that they were on the verge of victory and that Romney was a smart and capable guy in an absolutely desperate situation. This is a man who has been actively running for president since 2004. Who turned down a $30 million salary in 2009 to run again. A man that is willing to say anything to win that office. Maybe the Obama team, so disciplined and smart for so long, got overconfident and severely misjudged the proper strategy for this debate.
• After Bill Clinton's amazing convention speech, expectations were high for Obama's address to close the DNC. When he came off as uninspired, some speculated that perhaps he had a warning that September's job numbers would be soft and he wanted to set a more subdued tone. But after Wednesday, when the president seemed like he'd rather have been anywhere else, one has to wonder: Is the man's heart fully in this race? Remember, President Obama and his closest advisors have maintained that from the outset of their campaign in 2007, Obama did not have an unshakable need to be president. And he has had to endure so much, that maybe he's suffering from a personal enthusiasm- gap.
• Maybe Al Gore was right and the altitude got to him.

• Many outlets have pointed out, in tones both serious and satirical, that if the purpose of the debate was to make honest arguments for one's positions, then Obama actually dominated. Romney contradicted his own statements and distorted his own positions. Obama called him out (for the most part) and was honest with the American electorate. And it's a sad indictment of our culture and media that Romney's performance can be called a "win." But I can't buy that. For many voters the debates are the start of election season, or at least a time to form strong opinions. Yes, the media should be honest about what Romney said. But the voters who are undecided or uninformed are not watching those recaps anyway (and who can blame them). Obama had a responsibility to call out the BS, at the risk of his image, for the good of his campaign and the country. He failed. But Romney's debate tactics lead to my last point...

• Romney, fighting off retirement and for his political life, morphed back into the Massachusetts Moderate conservatives reviled all through their primary (who saw that coming?). On Social Security, Medicare, taxes, Romney blurred his differences with the president. He even bragged about his Massachusetts health care plan. One of his advisors almost got fired for doing that this summer! Republicans are juiced up after their nominees excellent performance, and they have every right to be. But how can conservatives feel good when, after they longed for an ideological-choice-election led by Rep. Paul Ryan, Romney saved his campaign by acting like a blue- dog Democrat? Got to turn their stomachs a bit... but I'm sure they'll take it.

He's probably still going to win, though

Republicans Have a Big Problem And It Ain't Mitt

There is a dirty little secret festering beneath the surface of Governor Mitt Romney's presidential campaign. What started as whispers by the Republican establishment has grown into a murmur, and will likely be heard as a dull roar when President Obama takes his next oath of office in January. The secret is the plain and, for Republicans, painful truth that theirs is no longer a national party.

The Republican party's candidate for president has won the popular vote only once in the last five elections. If President Obama's current lead holds, that will be one win, George W. Bush's squeaker in 2004, in twenty- four years.

As America's demographics continue to shift toward people of color, the Republican message of deregulation and tax cuts will grow more stale and ineffective. Those policies have failed to help middle-  and lower- class families for 30- plus years, but until this decade, Republicans were able to attract those voters and win national elections through social issues. More than just raising wedge issues like abortion or gay marriage, Republicans would often talk about societal decline in racial overtones. Whether it was Ronald Reagan's anonymous welfare queen or George H.W. Bush's Willie Horton ad, Republicans gleefully ostracized minority voters.

But a funny thing happened on the way to Karl Rove's permanent majority.

The country got less white, and it gets less so every year. Working class whites have an interest in the status quo, and can be called "conservative" in the true sense of the word. This group often resents what they see as government intrusion through policies of affirmative action or welfare. Meanwhile, immigrants look to the government to provide a fair system and safety-net as they work to establish themselves. Meaning Ronald Reagan's base is shrinking as Barack Obama's grows.

Furthermore, society's evolving positions (to borrow a phrase) on issues like gay marriage and immigration, have taken once powerful weapons of mobilization out of the Republican arsenal.

So, Republican orthodoxy of tax- cuts and deregulation increasingly has to stand on its own, without social issues and under-the-table prejudice to help win the day.

And the results have not been pretty for Republicans.

Take this summer's nominating conventions, each a chance for the parties to convince the American people of its vision for government. The Republican convention came and went without a ripple, let alone a splash. Meanwhile, Democrats are still riding a wave of support generated by their prime-time speakers. The success of one convention and failure of another was not about Bill Clinton's eloquence or Clint Eastwood's nonsense. Democrats are just selling a product that more voters want to buy.

Make no mistake, the polls in this election will continue to be tight, and the Republican strategy can still work when their side is far more motivated to vote. But that isn't easy to pull off in presidential politics. And thanks to that shift in demographics and increased Republican extremism, there are flat out more people who identify and believe in the Democratic vision than the Republican.

This is something the Romney camp seems to recognize, and since tabbing Ayn Rand in shirt sleeves for vice president, the campaign it has made a hard turn to the center. That includes ads where Romney implores voters that he cares about working people just as much as the President does, and an interview in which he praised parts of Obamacare. His campaign realizes that if only 2006 Governor Romney were running, he'd have a real shot.

As First Read and Politico reported, Republicans have begun to lay the blame for a disappointing campaign on Romney himself, asserting that he did not present the clear case for conservatism. Among them, Governor Chris Christie, eagerly awaiting his 2016 run for the White House, told Meet the Press that Wednesday's debate would turn the election because Romney would  go head-to-head against the president with a message of conservatism. The implication was clear: if the campaign continues to falter it isn't about the opportunity or the message, it's the messenger.

Republicans hope that repeating this lie enough might somehow make it true. But deep down theirs is an inconvenient truth: that in order to reclaim its status as a national party, the Republican party must come to grips with a changed nation. If they don't, they'll look back on this election not as a disappointment, but on the closest they came to the presidency in a generation.

The Lion Sleeps

It's been a long time since my last post on SAM Online, but I thought I'd return to honor the late Sen. Ted Kennedy.

I remember the first time I heard Ted Kennedy speak. I was 12 years old and listening to talk on the radio about Kennedy's race against the first serious challenger (after 32 years) to his Senate seat- young venture capitalist Mitt Romney. It was 1994, and polls were tight, but the buzz that morning was that Kennedy had put the up- start away in the previous night's debate.

They went to a clip of an excited Kennedy laying into his rival. A bombastic Boston brouge pierced through my clockradio's modest speakers. I was shocked at his volume, and at how articulate and how passionate he sounded.

You have to understand, if you grew up outside of Massachusetts in the early 90s you knew of Ted Kennedy as something of a punchline. Those years were not particularly kind to Kennedy as his drinking and carousing hit their peaks. His legendary brothers, whose pictures hung on the walls of my bedroom, only exaggerated his flaws.

Kennedy's voice, used tirelessly to advocate for the down trodden, shocked me that morning. I couldn't believe it, but it was equal to his family's incredible legacy. It was big, proud and instantly recognizable- like the man himself. That moment I first heard it, I gained new respect and reverence for Senator Kennedy. And the more I heard him speak and learned about his life and work the more my respect grew. An unabashed liberal, Kennedy rose the minimum wage, passed laws for the disabled, and got poor children health insurance. He made government work, used it to improve society.

I never met Ted Kennedy, but he seemed like my favorite type of person. He seemed to love life, and to be unashamed to live it boldly. He did great things, made some terrible mistakes, and had an impact. He and his family chose the public arena, fought for causes worth believing in and were rarely mere spectators.

Tonight we are without Ted Kennedy's voice, but we should never lose his ideals or the spirit with which he chased them.

Welcome Back, Mitt

Once a popular moderate voice, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney began to shed many of his more liberal stances in 2004 as he geared up for a presidential run. Back then, George Bush had illuminated the path to victory for a national Republican-- run hard to the right on divisive issues and pursue 51% of the electorate.

Campaigns start so early that it is easy for candidates to misjudge electoral winds, and those who craft their message based exclusively on what the people want to hear seem to invariably fall into this pitfall. As it happened, the failure of Bush's second term meant Romney badly overplayed his conservative hand in a year Republicans ultimately nominated a moderate voice.

In today's political climate, where Republicans debate their party's direction, Romney-insiders have said he is "troubled" by the politics of VP- nominee Sarah Palin. It seems that Romney realizes that if he's to be successful he must play to his own strengths, which, as a former wildly successful CEO and venture capitalist, are on the economic front.

To that end, he authored an editorial in today's New York Times (that elitist rag so reviled by Governor Palin & co). In it, Romney suggests that what Detroit's big- three automakers need isn't a bailout, but a complete re-structuring that bankruptcy would afford.

His prescription is threefold:

1. Eliminate their disadvantage relative to foreign competitors through new labor agreements. Romney claims that excessive labor and retirement benefits cost US automakers $2000/car.
2. Overhaul current management. Romney seeks to end the enmity between labor and management through less salary and more stock for executives, and fewer luxuries and direct communication with workers as well. It's a strategy used by Romney's father (former Michigan governor, George), who turned around American Motors in the '60s.
3. Invest in the industry's future, with government assistance. The government should increase investment on fuel technology five-fold (to $20bn), and partner with private enterprises to increase R&D for innovation.

It is nice to see Romney advocating solutions, and it makes one think of what would have happened if the economic crisis had come at a different point in the presidential campaign. Regardless, Republicans should look to men and women of his stature and expertise as the party attempts to regain credibility with the American people. That assumes, however, Romney will save his breath for issues that really matter to him and the lives of other Americans.

What Happened Last Night?

NBC's Chris Donovan reports:


MCCAIN
9 states
3 red states /6 blue states
Arizona
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Illinois
Missouri
New Jersey
New York
Oklahoma


ROMNEY
6 states
4 red states / 2 blue states
Colorado
Massachusetts
Minnesota
Montana
North Dakota
Utah

HUCKABEE
5 states
5 red states
Alabama
Arkansas
Georgia
Tennessee
West Virginia

OBAMA
13 states
9 red states / 4 blue states
Alabama
Alaska
Connecticut
Colorado
Delaware
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Kansas
Minnesota
Missouri
North Dakota
Utah

CLINTON
8 states
4 red states / 4 blue states
Arkansas
California
Massachusetts
New Jersey
New York
Oklahoma
Tennessee

My Take: It looks like the Republican race is all but over. Romney failed to claim California, Connecticut or any southern state. So he didn't establish himself as McCain's "conservative alternative," as he'd hoped. Instead, he won Mormon- heavy states and his home state. Huckabee, meanwhile, impressed, and seems likely to be the Vice Presidential nominee.

It's air- tight on the Democratic side right now. Each candidate did what they had to, but nothing more. Obama hoped for a coup in New Jersey or California, but didn't threaten Clinton in either. However, he was able to pick up red states and show his general appeal. It affirms my earlier prediction that Obama will have an easier time beating John McCain (especially with Huckabee on the ticket, which is a tough combo), and showed his appeal in "moderate" states.

As for Hillary, she got a nice surprise with such an easy win in Massachusetts, and she handily won the big prize-- California. She was not able to claim true victory, however, and the longer this drags on, I think, the more the situation favors Obama.

Huckabee Wins WV, Romney PO'd

NBC News projects former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee won the West Virginia caucus, and picked up the state's 18 delegates.

This set off rival candidate Mitt Romney, who's campaign issued a scathing statement after Romney carried the caucus' first round of ballots with 41%, before Sen. McCain dropped out, and his campaign asked backers to support Huckabee, who won on the second ballot with 52%.

"Unfortunately, this is what Senator McCain's inside Washington ways look like: he cut a backroom deal with the tax-and-spend candidate he thought could best stop Governor Romney's campaign of conservative change.

"Governor Romney had enough respect for the Republican voters of West Virginia to make an appeal to them about the future of the party based on issues. This is why he led on today's first ballot. Sadly, Senator McCain cut a Washington backroom deal in a way that once again underscores his legacy of working against Republicans who are interested in championing conservative policies and rebuilding the party."

The Romney camp may also believe (as do I) that McCain has cut a deal with Huckabee, where Huck will stay in the race and detract from their candidate's support, until McCain sures up the nomination and tabs Huckabee as his running-mate. However, in all fairness, Huckabee has raised enough money and garnered enough support to earn the right to stay in this race.

Republicans Spar over Race

Issues of race have dogged the presidential primaries for the past couple of weeks. The Clintons traded barbs with the Obama camp on the civil rights movement, and who represents real change.

Recently, Republicans have gotten into the act with Mitt Romney using veiled attacks at competitors for not being "white enough."

At a recent campaign stop in Charleston, SC, Romney went on the offensive and aggressively sought the white vote.

"Republicans have a lot to choose from in this election, we have a chance to make a statement about our party, and move this country forward.

Everyone wants change! We all know that, but what kind of change do we want? Everyone wants a white man to be president, but what kind of white man do we want?

Do we want an old white man? Been there. Do we want a freaky religious white man? Done that. Do we want an old white man, with a possibly racist past that wants to abolish the federal government? Done it again.

I submit that America try something new- a really, really rich white man. I think that, as a people, we are ready for this."

Campaign spokesman Mark DeMoss later elaborated on Romney's questionable comments:

"It's true that we have had rich white men serve this great nation as president. We have one now. However, the Governor best represents the kind of change the Republican party yearns for. Remember, not only is he rich, and white, and male, but he also has great hair. We've never had such a head of hair in the White House, and America is eager to see that kind of change. And it's clear that 2008 really is the year of change for the Republican party!"

Follow-up calls to Romney's office and stylist were not returned for comment.

Michigan Recap

Mitt Romney came away with a huge win in the Michigan primary last night, winning on the strength of high Republican turn-out and his "favorite- son" status. John McCain finished in second eight points back, he'll have to win South Carolina or Florida to get his mojo back.

This couldn't have turned out better for Rudy Giuilani, because the race continues to be up for grabs heading into Florida (even though he got only 3% in Michigan, 1/2 that of Ron Paul's support). He's in a dead heat with McCain in Florida, where he's spent so much time and money, but now that McCain isn't the front runner, look for Rudy to gain in polls.

So the nomination is totally unclear, and remember the undeniable trend we've seen in presidential politics where the incumbent is not running: the party that decides its nominee first nearly always wins in November.

When Republicans Dropped the Ball

A couple of nights ago, during the Republican debate, there was a fiery exchange over immigration. Rudy Giuliani and John McCain went head-to-head against Mitt Romney, defending their position as fair and non-amnesty. The two did a good job of bringing Ronald Reagan into their fold, who offered flat out amnesty in 1986, and making the case that the penalties that go along with their plan means it is not amnesty.

Yet, as Joe Klein pointed out in audio here, Romney did well because neither Giuliani nor McCain ever hammered him with the obvious question: How are you going to get 12,000,000 illegals out of the US?

Rudy said to ship out those who have committed crimes, a much more manageable figure. But Romney decried that idea as amnesty. Yet he never said how he would get all illegal immigrants out of the US. And because McCain and Giuliani dropped the ball, he didn't have to.

Iowa's Winners and Losers

Last night Iowa caucus-goers made Mike Huckabee and Barack Obama big winners. So who else won last night? And who lost? Let's do a quick recap...

3 Big Winners-

John McCain: Huckabee's rise has come at the expense of Mitt Romney, who concentrated so much time, money and energy on the two early contests. Now that Romney is wounded, and McCain can pounce in his old New Hampshire strong-hold.

Democrats: Democratic caucus goers outnumbered Republicans 2 to 1. Also, 54% of Democratic caucus goers were first timers. That's unbelievable. Barack Obama dominated with young voters, and (gasp!) actually turned them out to vote. It's the unattainable goal of so many Democrats, and Obama may have finally found realized their potential.

Rudy Giuliani: The best case scenario for Rudy is a chaotic first few states before he jumps in in Florida. That means Huckabee in Iowa (check) McCain in New Hampshire and Romney in Michigan (where his father was governor). That way no one really has the momentum before he starts for real.

3 Big Losers-

Mitt Romney: See above, and know- if he doesn't win New Hampshire (his political backyard) he's finished. It's the same principle that doomed Howard Dean in 2004.

Hillary Clinton: What do you think Hill regrets the most? Running in Iowa in the first place; her answer to that illegal immigrant driver's license question in the Halloween debate; or moving to a new state to run for Senate, instead of waiting four years and running in her native Illinois and keeping Barack Obama in the state senate?

Fred Thompson: His relatively strong third place finish means he'll have to stick around through New Hampshire, and campaign another week instead of grabbing a cigar, a glass of scotch and the TV remote.

Romney and McCain clash in New Hampshire

Mitt Romney and John McCain are going mono-a-mono in the Granite State. Romney has to win there, given his close tie as Massachusetts governor and the time and energy he's spent there.

Meanwhile, McCain, who won the primary in 2000 has a legion of followers, and is trying to rejuvenate his campaign there.

The latest poll by Bloomberg and the LA Times has Romney ahead in New Hampshire 34- 20% over McCain. But McCain has been climbing, and if Romney takes a hit in Iowa (courtesy of Mike Huckabee in all likelihood) that'll get even closer.

In McCain's new ads he references the newspapers that endorsed him, and wrote up "anti-endorsements" of Romney.

Romney's Strategy Questioned

All along, Mitt Romney's path to the White House has run through Iowa and New Hampshire. He and his team decided that he could win in Iowa on fiscally and (new) socially conservative credentials, and in New Hampshire based on his popularity as neighboring Massachusetts governor. Rudy Giuliani, the front-runner, would essentially sit those races out, waiting to make his mark on the bigger stages.

The momentum from those early victories could then carry Romney to the nomination, a la John Kerry in 2004.

But this strategy is close to being derailed by an unexpected source, Mike Huckabee. He's claiming the social conservative mantel and is threatening in Iowa. The Washington Post notes the challenge (although not the source) was completely expected, and questions the overall strategy.

Senator, I knew John Kennedy...

With Mike Huckabee now nipping at Mitt Romney's heels in Iowa, the Massachusetts Mormon has planned a JFK- style speech addressing concerns about his religion.

In 1960, then- Sen. Kennedy gave a speech to the Houston Ministerial Association to make clear the Vatican would not have undue influence over the Catholic Kennedy. Romney had hesitated to make this speech in the past, but it now appears necessary as Huckabee's Christian conservative campaign gains steam.

The speech is so big for Romney that he's even writing it himself. He's got to try and let the Republican base know that he won't be unduly influenced by his religion, but by their religion as he changes his position on abortion and other social issues, and (of course) by corporate and other high income interests who seek to alter the tax code, and win government contracts.

The speech, called "Faith in America," will be a huge moment for both Romney and Huckabee.

Quote of the Day 11/26

“It's [time to] take the mask off and take a look at what kind of governor was he... He throws stones at people. And then on that issue he usually has a worse record than whoever he’s throwing stones at... I think there’s a difference between a guy who gets results, real results, that were applauded nationwide and somebody who had a mixed record at best as governor.”

- Rudy Giuliani in his most pointed attack on rival Mitt Romney. The gloves are off, and it seems that Giuliani is ready to try and take a chunk out of Mitt's big lead in New Hampshire.

This is a rhetorical shift for Rudy, who has been saving this kind of language for Hillary Clinton, in an effort to portray himself as the presumptive nominee. So the fact that Rudy is going after Romney now is probably a good sign for Mitt. Now he just has to respond. So far, the Romney campaign called the comments "nasty."

Clinton Vulnerable, Romney Rising

The air of invincibility that surrounded the Clinton campaign just weeks ago has taken a serious hit on the heels of her poor debate. Check out these numbers.

Clinton's New Hampshire lead, while still formidable, has shrunk nine points in one poll and 10 in another. According to the polls, her support has shifted to Obama, who picked up the 5 points she lost.

Meanwhile, Mitt Romney is on the rise. He now leads by 12 points in New Hampshire (32 to Giuliani's 20). As we've covered, Mitt's strategy rests with the early states, so this poll is great news for him. The former governor of Massachusetts cannot lose the New Hampshire primary, and it appears that he's exactly where he needs to be.

There are seven weeks until the Iowa primary.

Quote of the Day 10/29

“She hasn’t run anything, and the government of the United States is not a place for a president to be an intern. You need to have experience actually leading and running things.”

- Mitt Romney on Senator Hillary Clinton's lack of executive experience. Interesting choice of words seeing as how Sen. Clinton's husband, Bill Clinton, was impeached for lying about oral sex with a White House intern.

Of course, Romney may not have known about that.

Let the campaign begin...

Barack Obama has announced that the gloves are off, and he's going to take on Hillary Clinton directly and forcefully. To that end, the campaign has posted his speech on Social Security reform on its YouTube site. Notice, more specifically, that Obama is introduced by a "regular person"-- an Iowa school teacher who stumbles over his words in a humble and honest way. You can tell he wrote the introduction himself, probably with a pen and notebook. It's a nice touch.



As for the speech itself, I like it. It's very direct and honest. And, he refers to Clinton as "ducking the issue" and following "conventional Washington thinking." He calls for a renewed sense of purpose and "shared responsibility."

//More from Iowa\\

NBC reports that Mitt Romney's lead in Iowa has expanded to a commanding 36.2% to 13.1% over Rudy Giuliani. Mike Huckabee is on Giuliani’s heels at 12.8% and Thompson is fourth with 11.4.%. Romney was at 27.8% in August; Huckabee was at just 1.8%. McCain stands at just 6%. Nearly 15% of Republican voters say they are undecided.

Romney was the only Republican candidate polling better with women than men, he's dominating with females (must be the hair). In fact, most Iowa Republican men are supporting Giuliani or Huckabee, but overall the race doesn't appear to even be close.

Log Cabin Ad: Romney's Real Record

The gay Republican group, Log Cabin Republicans, uses sarcasm in a new ad in New Hampshire, intent on bringing down Mitt Romney. It goes after him as a flip flopper, who has been disingenuous about abortion, guns (gasp!) Ronald Reagan.

There's an obvious question here:
Why are the Loggers (that's what I call them) going after Romney?
Maybe because he distanced himself so quickly from his old buddy Larry "Slide your palm along the bottom of the stall" Craig. Or maybe they didn't like his anti-gay rhetoric in the lead-up to gay marriage in Massachusetts. Or maybe it has more to do with the Republican part of their identity than the Log Cabin part.

Whichever, it's bad news for Mitt. As President Bush's inside man, Dan Bartlet, said during a speech yesterday, a narrative is building against Romney as a flip flopper, and once it starts it's very tough to overcome. (Ask Al Gore or John Kerry about that.)

Bartlet said he thought the bigger issue was the candidate's Mormonism, which people don't like in the South, and that flip flopping is kind of a red herring for why they won't support Romney. Bartlet pointed out that Romney's team made the miscalculation that the Republican field would be more conservative than it's proven to be, and he adjusted his positions accordingly.

Rudy Giuliani has moved slightly to the right, but in a more nuanced way. Whereas Rudy vowed to appoint "constructionist" judges (who tend to be conservative on social issues), he hasn't completely ceded his stances as mayor of New York. Rudy has kept the faith that people can put up with his liberal views because they also represent perhaps his greatest asset: electability. Meanwhile, Romney described his change of heart on abortion and stem cells as almost a religious conversion.

So even if Barlet is right, and right now flip-flopping is code for "Mormon," a few more ads like this, and rest assured they'll come, and the building narrative might turn deafening.

John McCain campaign video

John McCain is running this ad in Michigan as he attempts to re-energize his campaign. It's a good ad, but what's most interesting is who is giving the the endorsement.

It's Utah governor Jim Huntsman, you know it because his name and title are left up for the duration of the spot. Choosing Huntsman to deliver the ad shows McCain is ready to take on Mitt Romney, who grew up in Michigan, but lived in and has close ties to Utah.

It'll be interesting to see how aggressively McCain goes after Romney in tomorrow night's debate.